> To make it much simplier, one probably would store integer values of
> y,m,d,h,m,s
> in separate fields corresponding to every numerical date. Then, such
> queries can be
> performed much simplier. I believe that memorable dates are important
> thing for many wikis:
> {{#ask:[[Date1::>{month=3,
> Plain numbers are interpreted as years. There could be another syntax for
> what
> you want here, though. Should not be a major problem, if we have a syntax
> proposal.
>
>
Well, it's just a number, stored in database. Maybe percent sign as prefix?
[[Date::>%internal_date_number_in_seconds
> Plain numbers are interpreted as years. There could be another syntax for
> what
> you want here, though. Should not be a major problem, if we have a syntax
> proposal.
>
>
Well, it's just a number, stored in database. Maybe percent sign as prefix?
[[Date::>%internal_date_number_in_seconds
On Monday, 13. October 2008, CNIT wrote:
> > Output is already localised anyway, using the wiki language in the
> > Factbox and the user language in Special:Browse etc. It is technically
> > not possible (without much added processing effort) to localise page
> > contents to user settings, since th
My Historical Date format uses a double-precision float. The mantissa of
that float should be adaptable to store a time, and will easily be as
precise as you need to be to store a time, precise to one second, with a
date. Specifically, it's a Julian date that goes from noon to noon
UTC--so some
> Output is already localised anyway, using the wiki language in the Factbox
> and
> the user language in Special:Browse etc. It is technically not possible
> (without much added processing effort) to localise page contents to user
> settings, since the wiki page is cached for all users.
>
>
On Freitag, 3. Oktober 2008, CNIT wrote:
> > OK, after that mail worked properly, here is my first update on the
> > implementation status in current SVN. If you develop with SMW, it is
> > suggested to go over this to see whether changes in your code are needed.
> >
> > Overview:
> >
> > * Files h
OK, after the previous mail worked properly, I tried to send the below mail
and again it did not get through yet. Is it me or is anyone else experiencing
problems posting to SourceForge lists?
Anyway, here is my first update on the implementation status in current SVN.
If you develop with SMW,
> OK, after that mail worked properly, here is my first update on the
> implementation status in current SVN. If you develop with SMW, it is
> suggested to go over this to see whether changes in your code are needed.
>
> Overview:
>
> * Files have changed for easier reading and maintenance.
> *
OK, after that mail worked properly, here is my first update on the
implementation status in current SVN. If you develop with SMW, it is
suggested to go over this to see whether changes in your code are needed.
Overview:
* Files have changed for easier reading and maintenance.
* Factbox display
10 matches
Mail list logo
